This is seriously the stuff that internet lacks, great job. Finally someone who's not like 'let's shoot some crappy, expired color film and get funky results, great init?'

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Piotrini Thank you! The outline I use for these videos had some comments and feedback from users, so I owe a lot of the quality of this series to user input.

@hoorayforpentax3801

6 жыл бұрын

From camera-back mishaps, Lord preserve us. From darkroom light leaks, Lord preserve us. From spent fixer, Lord preserve us. From Lomo hipsters, Lord preserve us.

@arandomhungarian1659

Жыл бұрын

Pretty accurate lol Or: "Let's shoot kodak gold that expired in 2009 and then say that shooting film/the camera/the film itself is trash and you shouldn't buy it"

Wow probably the most in depth video I've seen in a single type of film here on KZread. That's hard to find. I learned a lot. Do you have more? Thanks for this wonderful presentation.

Without a doubt the most informative videos about different films that I have come across (with examples!). Not to mention it is great that you explain the curves from film datasheets and how to read them. Because of your break down, I feel like I can look at any curve data for film and interpret it. Thank you for sharing the knowledge.

@DavidHancock

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you! The curve breakdown's rules would apply to any film, yes. Some film makers don't provide the same level of curve data as Ilford (which has great datasheets.)

David Hnacock, you're my man! I really really appreciate it that someone puts this kind if effort into really showing what there is to show about film these days. So please don't stop it! I'd love to see your take in tri-x, tmax etc. etc. best daniel

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you! These are a lot of fun to make, they just take a lot of time. It looks like next up will be Lomo 800. I have almost enough photos to make that video. I think that Rollei Retro 80S will be ready after Lomo and I'm around 95% of the way to having enough photos for that video. Tri-X 400 will be the next Kodak branded film, I believe, and I'm around 85% complete in terms of collecting photos for it.

David another completely awesome video chock full of valuable information. Thanks for sharing it!!

@DavidHancock

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you, Harold!

Looking forward to more in this series!

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Christopher May Thank you. I'm finishing up taking photos for a few of them right now. My plan is to have more of these before the end of the year.

just gonna try this film soon, so thankful for this 👌

@DavidHancock

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Thanks for the video! It's a Godsend. I'm about to dive back into B&W film developing, and I intend to start with a combination of FP4+ (120) and Rodinal (i.e., Fomadon R09). My previous combination was Delta 100 and Xtol. My favorite photographer is Peter Lindbergh, who shot on Plus-X, which gave his photography more of a gritty look. So, that said, I'd welcome the gritty look that Rodinal will probably bring to my work.

Absolutly loveing the video . Actually getting the idea of film . How it works and so . Thank you !

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Thank you so much for this wonderful information.

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Just bought some to try out and then this video shows up in my subscriptions. Right on!!

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

monty PEEL Perfect timing! You'll be really happy with FP4+. I think it's Ilford's best film (though I personally prefer PanF+ over FP4+.)

Aside from just acknowledging the great usefulness of this video I need to express a heartfelt thanks. Thanks! I feel I can much better calibrate explorations with FP4. -- Much better confidence moving forward with this. Fine effort, - won't be wasted, I promise.

@DavidHancock

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Thank you! More Please! It's about time someone did this series!

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

mugenhead I will absolutely be doing more of these. I expect to have the next one done in less than a month. My hope is that as I get my sea legs with this series I can complete them faster and better.

@MidwestBriar

9 жыл бұрын

Good to hear! I want to thank you for not only talking about the aesthetic value of the film but also elaborating on the super nerdy technical stuff like reciprocity failure and light spectrum sensitivity. It is very helpful and well done!

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

mugenhead Thank you. I'm hoping that film users of all levels can benefit.

Loved this video.. thanks for sharing!

@DavidHancock

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

thanks for this video!, excellent information here

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

Pablo Riquelme You're very welcome and thank you. I'll be making more videos in this series as I get enough images developed for the films I'm working on right now.

I love FP4 too. Great video. Keep up the good work!!

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

Marc Meeks Will do. I've been taking a LOT of film photos this summer (including a lot of times when I'd normally go digital) to help get enough images for more videos in this series. I'm getting close to the next few and hope to have more All About Film videos this fall.

Excellent video, and timely for me, as I just switched over to FP4 in bulk from Foma 400. Thank you.

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you! You'll enjoy FP4+ a lot. I like Foma, but FP4+ is definitely a better film.

helpful info, thanks!

@DavidHancock

4 жыл бұрын

Glad it was helpful!

Very helpful. Thanks.

@DavidHancock

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Love your videos. Great information.

@DavidHancock

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Wow, what an excellent presentation. FP4+ is my favorite film, I've been shooting it for years, mostly 4x5, but there is still more to learn.You touched on what I find most beautiful about this film; its capacity for pulling, or contracting as Ansel Adams termed it, allows a scene that is a stop (zone) or two wide in contrast to be rendered into lovely and delicate midtones. Water bath development is best for that. I didn't realize the film's response to red filters is so problematic. I would advise any serious film photographer to watch this video. Thank you David.

@DavidHancock

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you! I greatly appreciate that, Michael, since this was my first of this series and I was learning how to make them and I think this is also far from my strongest All About Film video.

Yet another great video, congratulations :) I have used the FP4+ at ISO 250 and I loved its results. I pretty much always use it for portraiture. Stunning film. p.s. you're right about the 24 exposures available in Europe. An Italian friend of mine bought it online at a very good price, only to find out it was the 24 exp. and not the 36... :)

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Matteo Prezioso Thank you! I love FP4+. I took a break from it as I've been shooting other films for subsequent videos in this series, but I miss using it.

Great vid man!

@DavidHancock

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Thanks David, great informative video.

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

tailwheel65 Thank you! What film are you looking forward to seeing a video about?

@tailwheel65

9 жыл бұрын

David Hancock besides Tri-X which I see you have in your pipeline, how 'bout TMAX-400. I've only developed a couple 120 roles in xtol but was happy with the results. How would it compare to Tri-X 400. Looking forward to Acros video. For whatever reason I've never used it but would like to try someday. (Too much film in the frig now that needs to get used.) Thanks!

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

tailwheel65 I personally like Tri-X better than TMax. But, my relationship with both TMax 100 and 400 is mixed. I love the results but HATE the processing. They take forever to fix, fix unevenly if the fixer is getting too old, and after they fix take even longer to wash. And failing to leave them in the fix and wash long enough leaves TMax with a contrast-robbing purple stain. To me, Tri-X is significantly easier to process. Plus, I like the grain pattern better than I do with TMax 400. As for too much film in the fridge, my fiancee can tell you about that, too. I keep my motion picture film spools in the fridge because they come in tins from 400 to 2,000 feet.

Wonderful info.I'm switching back to film from digital and I'm using my Hasselblad. I was thinking of stand development 1to100 for landscape and outdoor still lifes. This gives me a great starting point.

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Michael Sittig Thank you! Medium format and FP4+ are great companions.

Traditionally film speed has been rated by using a standard candle that is lit and having it placed one foot from the film surface. This is referred to as a "foot candle." The amount of exposure via time is recorded to determine exactly when the particular film being tested began to respond to exposure. This was how an ASA or DIN rating was determined. Fine tuning of this method was further determined by processing. Although the particular aims for processing was not a standard (each film manufacturer seemed to have their own in-house aims) the exposed film was then processed to achieve a certain density range between 2 given exposure steps. When the aim was achieved with an adjusted re-exposure (of foot candles) then the ASA and DIN was published along with the recommended development time and temperature. I have to add that this procedure did not satisfy Ansel Adam's requirements because it did not represent "real life" experiences with a camera. So he came up with his own method of determining specific ASA ratings for the films he was using. Here is a link to a series of lessons discussing this topic. Albeit a bit technical it may prove interesting to some of you. kzread.info/dash/bejne/lHWIs8mhYsfRf5M.html

@user-do5hd7zb4x

4 ай бұрын

Dear tie chief be me thank you Sir! YOU have great film knknowledge. Most greatful!

That explanation at the front is absolutely amazing. I hate it I really really hate it when KZreadrs make a video on some obscure subject and don't even explain anything about it so when a random person comes in and watches it they are just completely lost and just leave the video because they have no f****** clue what is going on. The more people need to start doing what you are doing. Thank you.

@DavidHancock

Жыл бұрын

Thank you!

This is just fantastic. I've been looking online for detailed technical comparisons of the qualities of different films, but haven't really found a decent source. For some films I can't find anything. Having this resource will be great. I can't wait for the further videos in the series. By the way, the reciprocity failure equation for FP4+ is as follows, this is from Ilford: If you wish to calculate a corrected exposure time based on the ILFORD chart, use the formula Ec=Em^1.48 Where Ec is the corrected exposure, and Em is the measured exposure, in seconds. Measured exposures of one second or less do not require any compensation. Note that this formula is based on the chart. The chart was determined from experimentation. Times calculated past the chart should be good estimates, but are not based on ILFORD experiments. David Carper ILFORD Technical Service

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

William Wragg Thank you, and the formula from Ilford is really helpful, too. Right now I'm finishing taking photos for the Fuji Acros and Rollei 80S videos. I plan to finish taking photos for those two videos this summer. I'm also working on Delta 100, Delta 400, and a couple of Lomo films right now. So once this series gets rolling it should start progressing well.

Excellent video. Many thanks.I cannot think of any better film in medium speed than FP4, especially after the fact that Kodak Plus X 125 is RIP.

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

Jay John Plus-X 125 is probably my favorite black and white film ever. I have two rolls of 36 in my fridge still, but they'll be used this year. I wish that Kodak had discontinued TMax 100 instead of Plus-X.

Thanks for taking the time to put this together. Currently, I'm shooting Delta 100 (8x10) with Ilfosol 3 (1:14) and I'm pulling my hair out. I can't seem to wrestle down the highlights to get what I'm looking for. Everywhere I look, it seems like FP4+ with D76 @ 1:1 is getting positive reviews. I'll order a box of this due to your presentation. Thanks and keep up the great work.

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you! For your Delta, it's a bit harder to control the film. Give it a shot at 50 ISO and develop accordingly. Also, Ilfosol, even though it's made by Ilford, is not as favorable to all the Ilford films as is D-76 or even Rodinal. With LF, Rodinal and pulling the Delta may be a good backup. It might also be worth trying D-76 1+3 with the Delta at 50. The cut developer and the pulling ought to control the highlights well. I used to be a big fan of Ilfosol but I'm not any more, for reasons similar to those you've had.

@Walkercolt1

4 жыл бұрын

Dilute the developer more, reduce the temperature or reduce the development time. That will reduce the GAMMA curve(not the same thing as contrast) and bring down the highlights down to what will print well. DO NOT overexpose Delta films. You are spoiling the reduced grain structure they produce. An important point, with all the Delta films, to very accurately expose and develop properly. They are professional films and need to be handled professionally.

Thanks a lot!

@DavidHancock

2 ай бұрын

Thank you!

Another great episode! There is another very good combination with FP4+: the Ilford DD-X (1:6 @ 20C for 9:30 min). One can see a pretty good youtube tutorial of Dave Butcher (Darkroom Dave) a former chemist of Ilford company. The results @ 120 roll film are very impressive in my opinion

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you! Dave is great and knows his stuff. I haven't used the DD-X developer before, but plan to when I start shooting the Delta videos in earnest. FYI, the Tri-X AAF is rendering right now and should be uploaded and live later tonight.

Film geeks rule. Well done, Your Majesty. There's an app called Reciprocity that allows you to select your film and metered exposure time and it calculates your needed/adjusted exposure time. I'm a big fan of FP4 Plus.

@DavidHancock

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you! I am a huge fan of that app, too. I used it the other week photographing an interior with TMax 100 using available, artificial light after dark. I developed the negatives and they were spot-on. It's a great program.

I must be missing something in 30 years doing photography I have never used ilford film. Am a plus x pan guy and now t max and tri x, know them both. I have to try ilford. Love the enlarging pape, fiber base Matt surface , is flawless.

@DavidHancock

5 жыл бұрын

Ilford makes nice film. To my eye, Ilford has a more classic look than Kodak stocks, which are very polished. Ilford films are also very easy to handle and process.

I've found FP4+ in 4x5 and 5x7 shot at ISO 100 and developed in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 to be outstanding as is the 35mm version shot at ISO 250 and developed in Diafine 4+4. You really can't go wrong with FP4+ as long as, as you noted in the video, you don't try to push the filtration too far to the red side. A yellow #12 is about as dark as I would want to go with FP4+. I don't tend to shoot FP4+ in medium format just because Tmax 400 in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 or Tmax 100 in Rodinal 1:50 are my go to combinations for MF. Great stuff. Excellent video.

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Gregg Obst Thank you! I haven't used Pyrocat or Diafine with FP4+, but from what I know of them they should complement the film nicely.

What a great video! Oh my gosh!

@DavidHancock

6 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

@gchristopherklug

6 жыл бұрын

The information about the filters, the details about scanning the film as opposed to traditionally printing it.. I've never heard that anywhere else. Thank you so much.

@DavidHancock

6 жыл бұрын

Thank you! In later videos, I expanded the script section on film digitization to discuss tips and so forth on how to digitize the film.

@gchristopherklug

6 жыл бұрын

Ooh, I just discovered your channel today. Do you know which video that is?

@DavidHancock

6 жыл бұрын

I can do one better. Here's a link to the playlist that has all of the All About Film videos that I've made: kzread.info/dash/bejne/n3idr5OeoqW7erQ.html

THanks for the video! It really helps me deciding on a go-to film stock. If only you would have a video on foma 200, too ;D

@DavidHancock

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you! Someday but not soon. I'm shooting 400 this year.

Very in depth video.I usually Delta 100 so I'm looking forward to that video.I wish I had a setup where I could process my own film.Maybe in the future.

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

M Poole Delta 100 is in the plan for 2015. I'm going to pick up some more this summer once I use my existing stockpile. Developing film at home doesn't require much space. The materials you need could be stored inside a shoebox when not in use, for a small kit. If you use a liquid concentrate developer instead of D-76, for instance, the liquid container takes up very little space (the Rodinal 120ml containers, for instance, are smaller than a pocket flashlight.) If you ever decide to jump in, let me know and I can suggest some ways to get started.

@MrMarkpoole

9 жыл бұрын

David Hancock The main reason I use Delta is I can get it at a camera store that's not too far from here.Next month they are having another swap meet,so I'll look for darkroom stuff.Eventually I want to set up to process B & W film.Printing would take up way too much space,but with a changing bag and some practice I think I could set up to do some film.I've always wanted to bot never had a place to set up a real darkroom.

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

M Poole I don't even print at home often -- about once a year. I prefer to develop and then digitize with my DSLR. The results are typically pretty good and, more importantly, it's a lot of fun.

I found that FP4 120 worked well with an ISO from 64 to 125. It's great for portraiture rated at 85. The texture of dark clothing is outstanding. XTOL 1:3, room temperature, 11 minutes, first minute continuous agitation, one inversion every 60 seconds thereafter. This was my default film for bright light or controlled conditions. For a variety of lighting conditions, Tri-X was my film of choice. For low light, Delta 3200.

@DavidHancock

3 жыл бұрын

Nice! I do like pushing FP4+ when I use it. I find that brings out a nice image character.

Photons, not Electrons

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Steaphany Oops. You are correct.

@inevitablecraftslab

4 жыл бұрын

2:55 and foot-candle not foot-speed :)

20X24 Large Format now that’s photography!

@DavidHancock

4 жыл бұрын

Ideal for backpacking!

@marksummers5504

4 жыл бұрын

David Hancock Oh the pictures one could create! At my age the Mamiya RZ67 is about as large as I can do on backpacking. I need an assistant for that. I have been eyeing an 5X7 setup with a wide 90mm f4.5. I can only hope film (4x5, 5x7)will be around in 5 years.

I remember Ilford's photo magazine advertisements when they arrived in the U.S. market. FP4's capabilities were stunningly illustrated by having "Caucasian" and "African" female models posed next to each other. Great detail from highlight to shadow made me switch from Kodak Plus-X Pan for a time. (Eastman Kodak, caught off guard by this smashing ad campaign, had to "beat the drums" for Plus-X and Tri-X Pan!) The British (film) Invasion was quite successful, with Kodak selling more monochrome film developer than film.;)

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Nice! I don't recall those ads, but that would have been a compelling ad campaign back then. Even now, many films struggle with that thanks to legacy light-skin preference that's engineered into film due to the standards dating back to a time when only white models were used to calibrate film colors and tonality. Black and white film, however, does a MUCH better job with dark skin tones than does color.

@Otokichi786

4 жыл бұрын

The "Black And White Is Coming To America!" campaign popped up around the "1976 Bicentennial year(s)" (Or was it the 1980's?) and could be found in popular photographic magazines. Another "revolutionary development" was Photo Color C-41 plastic bottled liquid chemistry, which challenged Unicolor for the "home darkroom" market.

Fp4 dev in perceptual is wonderful great scale.

@DavidHancock

Жыл бұрын

Thank you! Not a combo I've tried yet.

Thanks! I'd love to see the same format for Delta 100 developed with perceptol and ilfosol 3 in particular.

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

FuzzyWasHeBear I'm taking photos for the Delta 100 video in the coming months with a go-live target of Q4. I've used Ilfosol 3 on it but have never tried Perceptol (for anything.) Is Perceptol the same as Rodinal?

@mamiyapress

9 жыл бұрын

David Hancock If you require images with the least amount of grain, half the box speed of the film (ISO 400 rated at ISO 200 in the case of HP5+) and develop in Ilford Perceptol. You can use 1+0, 1+1,1+2 or 1+3. The late Barry Thornton in first book "Elements, The Making of Fine Monochrome Images" recommends this procedure.

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

mamiyapress That's a great way to do it, yes. I shoot most of the Ilford films at half their rated speed. A low-grain developer is also key. I haven't tried Perceptol, but will once my Ilfosol supply runs out.

Excellent knowledge show with a tenacious practical experimental method - what is your opinion on HP5

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Paul Iwala Mixed. I think it has a genius level of engineering behind it and is one of the most well executed black and white films in terms of capturing sharpness and tonality at once, and I really don't find the way the images look appealing at all (until you get to large format work.) But that's simply a matter of preference for image appearance and I know a lot of people who like HP5+. So I've actually recommended HP5+ (in 35mm) for some people, specifically people doing street work and people wanting a gritty look -- urbex, graffiti, and so forth are good subjects if executed well. But I would believe it if someone told me that a good photographer can make HP5+ look great for portraits and landscapes in 35mm. I'm just not the photographer who can do that. In 120, HP5+ is only okay, but I still don't really find it to my liking. But when you get to 4X5, I like HP5+ in 4X5. As a large format film, the grain issues that I find turn me off of HP5+ in 35mm and 120 disappear and the tonal richness of the film comes through. Heck, in large format you can develop HP5+ in Rodinal and it looks great. Forget about that in small and medium format.

Back in the 70s I used to develop FP4 in Patterson's Acutol unfortunately no longer available, it was a 'one shot' developer and allowed FP4 to be rated at 200ASA.

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

northstar1950 Is there anything chemically close to Acutol on the market, or do you know if the formula was ever published? (I'm always stunned by the number of people who make their own developer )

@northstar1950

9 жыл бұрын

I really don't know David but it might be worth 'googling' it and see if any interesting recipes come up.

Only shot it a couple of times, wasnt impressedUntil i pushed it to 200! I do a lot of lowlight / street photographyvery informative video, will have to give it another shot

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Nice! What films do you typically use for street photography?

Dave, could you do one of these videos for Delta 100? Enjoy them very much!

@DavidHancock

6 жыл бұрын

It's in process. So far I have 33 photos for it, which isn't many. I'm about 25% of the way through image collection. So it's a while out still.

well its fp4 for me then hoping to do pinhole,and i have some box cameras to .. tnx jeff ..

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Jeffrey petch-harrison You're welcome!

Interesting video so thank you for taking the time to post. I've just bought some packs of 120 FP4+ with the intention of running at least one film through my collection of old cameras. I was considering ilfosol 3 as the developer, any thoughts?

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+bobsden25 I like Ilfosol 3 for FP4+. If you like the results I shared with Ilfosol 3 in the video, you're likely to like your results, too.

David, rhank you for sharing your scholarly appraisals, they are greatly valued. I shoot mainly large format with just a smattering of roll film in a 6x12 back for what could best be described as approximating 'New Topographics' in style. I use FP4 Plus a lot, developed in Ilfotec DDX diluted 1+6 but you mention. that there are other stocks better suited to built environment. May I ask, what are they? Are there reports on TXP 320 and Delta 100?

@DavidHancock

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you, Walter! Okay, so I have a hot take for you on media that is likely to seem very wrong at first. This will only work in sheet, but that's okay. Paper. I've been using Foma 332 (discontinued) for some built environment work with a pinhole camera. This shot is terribly framed, but it shows what paper and a pinhole can do: facebook.com/photo?fbid=10224823426359114&set=pcb.10224823451639746 Also, note that there is zero grain because, you know, 1 ISO paper. It'll be a few weeks, but I plan to give the same subject a go with the next generation of that 5X7 camera and also mount an Ilford 00 contrast reduction filter in the camera to pull down the shadows and highlights. Paper does lend itself to a very high contrast negative. At any rate, mull that over a bit as it's a WAY different approach to work and I don't know of many people trying paper for the built world. Alternately for films, I'd look at faster films pulled a bit. So matter of personal taste, I think of built environments as benefitting from shadow retention through contrast reduction in the negative with contrast addition as needed in post or the enlarger. To that end, something like a Foma 200 or Foma 320 soft, Ilfrod Delta 100, Kodak TXP 320, all pulled a stop or two could yield a nice, nice tonal range with a flat negative that can be manipulated a lot in post.

Hi, watched your great video in an attempt to figure out why I never took to FP4+. Even more puzzled now, everyone else seems to like it and you've given an eloquent account why you do. By the way, wasn't it photons hitting the crystals and not electrons? Or did I misunderstand that bit? Looking forward to watching more of your stuff!

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

Lambertus S. Hofstra Ah, yeah, photons is probably the correct particle, not electrons. FP4+ is definitely worth giving a go, especially in medium format if you shoot that. I'm in the process now of finishing shooting images for the Acros video as well as some others. Once I have enough images for Acros, it will be the next one of these I upload.

Thanks for your video ! Have you tried another Harman films like the Kentmere ?

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Fernandov. I have and I like Kentmere. It's not Delta 100 or 400, but it's a fine film in its own right. There are a good number of films of both speeds that I'd rather use, but I know a lot of good photographers who really like Kentmere and use it as their primary option.

@Reclubcl

8 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock Thanks for your quick response. I usually shoot Fp4+, but the Kentmere is so cheap. I'll give it a try. Thanks again !

adjusted exposure time = 0.104 * t*t + 2.08 * t, where t is measured exposure time in seconds. It should fit very well to the chart.

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+movax20h Can it be multiplied out in that sequence or does it need to have any parentheses?

@movax20h

8 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock , It doesn't require any additional parentheses. You do multiplications first, addition last. i.e. t = 5 : => 0.104 * 5 * 5 + 2.08 * 5 = 0.104 * 25 + 10.4 = 2.6 + 10.4 = 13 seconds t = 20 :=> 0.104 * 20 * 20 + 2.08 * 20 = 0.104 * 400 + 2.08 * 20 = 41.6 + 41.6 = 83.2 second It also works correctly for anything in range 1 to 35. I would even say you should good results up to 60 seconds metered exposure, but then adjusted exposure time is 500 seconds! Rather impractical.

@puppetyr

6 жыл бұрын

There is a much simpler method than this. FYI, the reciprocity chart discussed in this video is actually out of date, and does not accurately show the real reciprocity characteristics of FP4+. As I understand it, Ilford used to publish the *same* correction curve for their different films, despite them having quite different measurable reciprocity factors. I can only assume this was some kind of averaged, "middle of the road" solution. This works reasonably well with shorter exposures, but once the metered exposures get long (say, 15+ seconds) the differences in the accurate reciprocity-corrected exposure can get significant between films. Anyway, here is a link to updated reciprocity factors for all the different Ilford films: www.ilfordphoto.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Reciprocity-Failure-Compensation.pdf Calculating the corrected exposures is now very simple: just raise the metered exposure (in seconds) to the power of the factor. So, as an example for FP4+, a metered exposure of 30 seconds would give a corrected exposure = 30^(1.26) = 72.64 (or 73 seconds rounded up). Any smart phone will have a calculator app available that can do this.

FP4, if developed in Ilford's own developer Perceptol, gives allmost grainless results, however, from my expiriance, best results achieved in this combo are done if the film is rated at ISO 50 or 64, and with minute or so longer developing time than suggested...

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Nice! Thank you. I haven't tried that combination before.

When you talking about spectral sensitivity the spectrogram describe this for tungsten light, not for a daylight. It's important!

@DavidHancock

5 жыл бұрын

This video is designed to show people how to read the information, not answer every question. So coming away from that, the daylight chart will be easier to understand, too.

@erikvanleeuwen7376

5 жыл бұрын

Its a pity Ilford no longer provide the daylight spectral sensitivity on their data sheets. In the old days they did and that curve looks very different. Especially the sensitivity for blue and magenta is much higher at daylight.

My camera doesn't have the 125 iso setting, only 100 or 200, what should i pick?

@DavidHancock

4 жыл бұрын

100

Hello, In the video, the first serie of image are not pushed up in contrast ? You don't reduce the exposition ? I mean you take the pictures at 125 ISO and you don't pushed up +1 or +2 ? beacause there very good contrasts !

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

NXTExiTeDFR Are you certain that it's the first set of images lacks contrast? On both computer monitors I've checked this video on and my iPad screen, the first set of images has a nice tonal range combined with good transition between adjacent contrast areas.

@NXTExiTeDFR

9 жыл бұрын

David Hancock For sure ! I just want to know if you pushed up the treatment of the film at +1 or +2. In reality, I get the film and take pictures at 125 ISO and i want to know if i can develop with a treatment pushed to +1. thank you ( sorry for bad english)

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

Okay, I got it. So each photo group has a data page before it, and that page shows the developing time and mix versus the exposure ISO and other details. The first group were shot at the rated speed, I believe. I did push and pull the film a little bit,and found that pulling it to ISO 50 is nice. I really liked FP4+ at both 100 and 125 ISO and I think that it performs best in that range. Pushing it to 200 was okay, but this is not a film I would push excessively (that's a matter of personal preference.) If you want a medium-speed film to push, I've been experimenting with Delta 100 at 400 and I like the results a lot.

For clarity: ASA 125 = 22° DIN The correct way of writing the ISO number is thus: ISO 125/22° , which is a combination of both.

@DavidHancock

Жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Very informative. Given that I always develop with Rodinal, I might not have purchased 100 feet of FP4, if I had seen your video first. Maybe I'll order some D-76. What films do you like pairing with Rodinal?

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

DSC Photo For a long time, I would have said none and asterixed that with a caveat that I like Rodinal for large format. I do think that Rodinal creates too much grain, for my taste, for most 35mm film. I like it with Lucky SHD 100 and Eastman Kodak 2383, latter of which is an ISO 1.6 film and has such minimal grain that Rodinal works beautifully with it. If you shoot medium format, many films work well with Rodinal. If you shoot large format, even HP5+ looks good with Rodinal. I'll also add that though I don't like how much grain Rodinal introduces, I love the tonality that it brings to an image. So if grain isn't an issue for you, any film in any format can respond well to Rodinal.

@dsc5645

9 жыл бұрын

David Hancock I don't shoot much MF or LF currently. I don't mind grain, though the results I've gotten are a bit more grain than I'd like. I liked my results with Rodinal and Ilford Pan F 50 - I considered ordering a 100' roll of that, but 50 is a bit slow for me. Thanks for the video - would love to see more films explored in this depth.

Is there anywhere in grants pass oregon that carries pluss x by kodak? Thanks for your efforts with Ilford but I like kodak.

@DavidHancock

4 ай бұрын

Thank you and I doubt it since Plus X was disconnected around 2012.

I know there is massive variables, but have you considered a similar series on developers? For FP4+ I vary between Ilford S and Ilford LC29, as they give totally different looks. However, with HP5+ my go to is Rodinal or D76.

@DavidHancock

5 жыл бұрын

I have. I've been mulling over that, off and on, for a few years. I developed a format outline back in 2015 and the thing I would want to do would be to take a bunch of identical photos with sheet film, cut them film into a few different pieces, and then compare the same sheet of film developed properly in, say, D-76 stock, 1+1, and 1+3 (at minimum.) Using the same sheet would let me line up the images precisely and have exact seams on which to compare grain structures and whatever else between different dilutions of the same chemistry. What I've struggled with is how to compare them all to a baseline. So I think that what I need to do is buy small quantities of a lot of different developers and then figure out if I'm going to do one video or a series of short videos. But yes, it's something I want to do I just haven't settled on the best approach. I've been focusing on getting better at 4X5 this year, and one driving factor was that I want to do something with developers and I know I need good 4X5 negatives for that, and good 4X5 practices to have those good negatives.

@markharris5771

5 жыл бұрын

David Hancock I would be brilliant if you did do it. I think there’s only yourself that would be able to explain all the scientific stuff that’s going on and why different developers can give totally different outcomes. I’m a big believer that the film manufacturers usually make the best developers for that film, I’d love to find out if this is really true or it’s just me being anecdotal.

@DavidHancock

5 жыл бұрын

I think you're right. I can make time to do that after we finish out move next month. This was the motivation I needed to make those.

@markharris5771

5 жыл бұрын

David Hancock Thank you very much, I really appreciate that.

Great video :-) Helped me a lot. keep up the good work. Would like to see a video on FomaPan 100. D-76 1+5 - Would you recommend it for a 35mm roll of FP4? A 300ml solution volume tank.

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+budameat Thank you! For D-76 1+5, I've never stretched it that this, so I don't know what the results or times would be. The FomaPan video is in the early stages -- using the film and getting photos. I've taken a LOT of Foma photos, maybe six or so 100-foot spools, over the last five years, but I never recorded developer data back then, so the images aren't hugely useful for the video. My short-term videos are going to be Fuji Natura 1600 (which I think I have all the shots for and just need to sit down and do after I finish the K-3 K-3 II video manual series) and then Rollei Retro 80S. Those are the two that are closest to being complete. I forget what's next in line after those.

@budameat

8 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock But you wrote in the video D-76, 1+5, 23.00 dilution, stunning grain and contrast. Typo?

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

budameat Hmm. Good question. Maybe I have done D-76 1+5. Let me check after work and get back to you.

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock Oh yeah! I did dilute it to 1+5. The photos on the video at 1+5 are all 35mm. I like 1+5 for 35mm a lot.

@budameat

8 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock Thanks David. I'll give it a try at 1+5. No guts no glory, right? ;-) Looking forward to the FomaPan 100 video. Keep up the good work.

I have very limited experience with black & white film. What little 35mm black and white film I've shot, my favorite was Kodak Plus X. I don't do my own developing, so I will be limited to if/where I can get black & white negative film processed. So is Ilford FP4+ a good equivalent to Kodak Plus X? Worse comes to worse I can use my digital camera for black & white shots, which it works very well when the black & white film simulation option is chosen. But I love to shoot film so I'd like to find a good fine grain 35mm black & white film to use. Thanks.

@DavidHancock

4 жыл бұрын

I liked Plus-X WAY more. Plus-X was my favorite black and white film. Of the films made today, I think that Acros II will likely be the most like Plus-X (U haven't developed my rolls of it yet, so that's based solely on sample photos that I've seen from other people.) Ilford's Delta 100 is probably the closest to Plus-X in terms of character from Ilford. TMax 100 is an okay alternative, too, but it lacks some of the image character in trade for better technical capacity and greater dynamic range.

what is your recommendation for large format architectural work? great channel/ information by the way!!!

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you! For black and white, I'd go with Acros. It has a great dynamic range, almost no grain (especially in 4X5.) If you shoot 8X10, I on't think Acros is available in that size any more. In that case, I'd look into Delta 100 (I think that Ilford offers that in 8X10.) Delta 100 and TMax 100 (I think that's available in 4X5) are also good choices. For indoor work, check out Detla 400 which has less grain than HP5+. I forget if TMax 400 is available in sheet sizes, but it would be a good choice. Tri-X 320 in 4X5 might be a good option. For color film, Ektar would be my only suggestion. Dies that help? I know that's a lot at once.

@archiframed9161

7 жыл бұрын

Thanks! Great! Tmax400 is available in 4x5 > what difference do you see between Tmax400& Delta400? thx > arcos definitely & delta100 for being on the cheaper side some times... Why would you go for ektar over porta? In medium format I always preferred fuji 160 NC/400H and all time love for proviaF. Do you have any information on fuji`s film future? (vs Kodak commitment) I want to be set up for the near future in 4x5, but on the color side (although 160NC is still available in 4x5) Kodak seems the only way to go...(?) thx, really enjoy your videos!!! looking forward to the next "all about film" series best regards

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Portra has an advantage in that all the speeds have the same color profile. Ektar, however, has smaller grain and richer color. In 4X5, it's stunning. Portra is supposedly better for portraits, though I'm not 100% sure I agree with that notion. So ultimately, I'd go with Ektar as a matter of personal preference for the image quality and character it provides. I find the Portra color profile to be a bit flat and cool while Ektar tends to be warmer.

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Oh, the next AAF will be ROllei Retro 80S. I have four rolls left to take and I'm going to doe them all as IR since I got through the whole thing and realized I hadn't taken any IR photos with it. I should be walking again in about six weeks, maybe bit less, so I should be hiking and photographing again by the end of June.

@archiframed9161

7 жыл бұрын

thx - do you know - is there such a thing for fuji film orderings as canham cameras for kodak? looking forward to retro80S (wish y a good recovery!)

Could we please get an all about tmax 100 or maybe all about tmax400?

@DavidHancock

4 жыл бұрын

Definitely yes. TMax 100 is far along. I need around 25-35 more photos for the video. TMax 400 is much further out as I only have 25 photos set aside for it right now and need around 150 more. Almost all of the videos in this series are being delayed a bit due to COVID-19, me being laid off due to COVID-19, and not having money for film right now. I'll be able to finish up the Ektachrome 100 video this summer but I'm not sure when I'll return to the others. Hopefully late summer or early fall. TMax 100 was definitely on the track to be released this year. That could still happen if I land a new job by August.

@photosynthesis69

4 жыл бұрын

David Hancock I look forward to watching that when you finish. I enjoyed this one and the other all about films you have done so far. I like how you test the films with different developers or iso ratings. I asked because, generally I read nothing but good things about tmax 100. However, tmax 400 seems a bit more polarizing? I shot just tmax 100 for about 2 years and tried different developers. I tried d-76, Tmax RS, Rodinal, and f76+ and liked all of them except the tmax developer. But I haven’t figured out tmax 400 yet. I want to try it again because I’m trying to figure out which 400 speed film to shoot in both 35mm and 120.

Will you make a video on how to make black and white positive?

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

That is on the to-do list. I haven't mastered that well enough to turn it into a video yet.

@bublt4me

7 жыл бұрын

I'll be looking forward to it!

for the 1+100 dilution, is the smokey look of the image created by that or what? it looks beautiful

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Do you mean the dream-like look where everything kind of glows? That was due to the lens I was using, a simple, single-element meniscus lens with a very deep cup. I mounted it to a macro bellows and it creased the dreamy, glowing effect because that's a characteristic of deep-cup meniscus lenses. If you want to try it, it's a technique called pictorialism. I picked up the lens (I forget which inventory number it was) at Surplus Shed for around $5. I had to measure it and then order step-up and step-down rings off eBay to make a housing. I used an M42 macro bellows so that a 42mm step-up ring at the back could thread onto the bellows about one full turn (different thread pitches) and went to town. It was a lot of fun.

@glossbaby2893

7 жыл бұрын

yea. thinking of trying that

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

It's a fun experiment. With the right lens, it can work very well. Single-element lenses can be super sharp, though, too. The flatter the back of the single-element lens, the sharper (in general, not 100% true all the time). The deeper the cup on the back, the more glow it creates.

@glossbaby2893

7 жыл бұрын

David Hancock interesting to know. appreciate the advice!

Perceptol!

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

I've never tried Perceptol. At some point in the future when I start doing a video series for developing chemicals, similar to the AAF series, Perceptol will definitely be in there.

What is your experience with Kodak Xtol please.

@DavidHancock

5 жыл бұрын

With this film? None.

Your Comment on Rodinal 1+25 was "wow...." what does this specifically mean? I am asking because a minute later you were recommending Ultrafin and RPX-D.

@DavidHancock

6 жыл бұрын

Where are you seeing that? It's been a while since I uploaded this video and I don't remember all of it.

@klofisch

6 жыл бұрын

My fault. This Question is about the Acros. But may you can answer it here. I have one other, but i this one i would put there :) thanks

One question and one comment: Question: Do you recommend to have a yellow filter attached all the time or only in specific situations? Comment: Kodak D-76 is a classic but I have given up on it completely for in my opinion you get exactly the same fantastic results using the newer Kodakt XTOL. XTOL really gives the same results but it is easier to mix (no heated water necessary) and - and that is the most important reason for me - it is non-toxic. I would not suggest drinking it, but at least it is not pure poison. That being said: Of cause if you work with D-76 properly, there is no real danger othere, too.

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

For filters, I use them and not depending on the subject and the result I want to achieve from the image. I have left filters on for whole rolls, but that's the exception, typically. Some films, like Foma, really shine with a yellow filter and I'll leave it on full time then. FP4+ is a pretty great film with or without, so I don't leave a filter on full-time with FP4+. I have mixed feelings about XTOL. It can deliver great results, but it has a brief shelf life compared to D-76. MY experience was that as it aged it was less predictable and also that us it was used the stock solution remaining in the bottle aged faster (which makes sense because the air in the bottle probably contributed to oxidation.) But I like the results a lot and think it's a great developer (and the less-toxic nature of it is a key selling point, too.)

@Kref3

8 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock hi David. you are right about the shelf life. I usually mix xtol, which is pretty cheap, with demineralized water and the get 5l for really small money. I also bought myself 25 brown Glas bottles of 250ml (as far as I know this is 5 ounces on medieval terms ☺). I always use it 1+1 and my Jobo tank takes needs 470ml but can take 500ml as well. So one of these bottles is exactly the right amount to develop the two film fitting into the tank. of cause the bottles must be really really full. like not one drop more full. Zero air inside and stored in a dark place the stock keeps working for about a year from what other people tried. As it is so dirt cheap I decided not to take risks and replace any left overs after 6 months. usually I use it up earlier but in the last month I photographed a little less so two bottles went down the sink. I think we are talking about 50 US cents here. I never ever had any issues with xtol stored like this and disposed after 6 months.

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

Thorsten Latz I'm sold. :D I'll give XTOL another go with my next developer purchase. I think I have two bags of D-76 and half a bottle of Rodinal left, so I'll probably need more developer before the end of summer (I have about 100 undeveloped rolls of film right now.)

Has anyone come up with an equation for calculating the required exposure time due to reciprocity? Using your graph I was able to estimate the data points pretty closely and set up a table in Excel. After graphing and modeling I come up with a polynomial equation that estimates the corrected value very closely. If the meter-indicated exposure is x (in seconds), then the corrected exposure in seconds is equal to (0.1053x^2)+(2.031x)+0.0112. The x^2 means "x squared". Hope that helps.

@DavidHancock

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you! that helps a lot.

I have a Fomapan 400 B&W and I'm not sure what developer I need to use on it, c-41 etc?

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

C-41 won't work for black and white. Check out Digital Truth's Massive Development Chart for a list of known and suitable developers.

@johnnguyen7587

7 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock Thank you!

what kind of process is this film? thank you

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Any clack and white process (neither C-41 nor E-6 will work.)

Wow

@DavidHancock

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

I think your grain problems with Rodinal with this film may be that it isn't responding well to the stand process. Have you tried it at 1+25 or 1+50?

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

jcnash02 Well, I didn't stand develop it. Even when I dilute Rodinal that much, I still invert and rotate it. I think that the FP4+ just didn't like it. To be fair, I only have one film that I've used in 35mm that I really like the Rodinal results from. So it could also just be personal taste. I do like Rodinal for large format and on some medium format films it works nicely. Speaking of Rodinal, Your FA is going in the mail on Monday. I included four rolls of film (that was all I had in the way of reloadable cassettes.) There are two rolls of Kodak 2383, which is an ISO 1.6 film. It's six stops slower than 100 ISO. When you use it, it works great in Rodinal. Just develop it with the same times as you would for TMax 100. The other two are Ilford P4 Surveillance film. On the Massive Development Chart, there's Rodinal data for it for 125 and 400. It's an amazing film and I've used it up to 6400. It has no noticeable grain increase when pushed until 3200. It is about five years past code, so it's lost about a stop of speed.

@jcnash02

9 жыл бұрын

Very cool. I sent you an email with the result of the Pan F testing. I look forward to trying those out.

David, why didn't you review the ILFORD XP2 SUPER 400? :(

@DavidHancock

Жыл бұрын

I haven't had time yet.

@3SGrover

Жыл бұрын

@@DavidHancock I'll be waiting. Your film reviews, damn, crawl. I kept them for myself, I will look after them before working with this or that film If interested, I am ready to send my photos from XP2.

How hard can 220 be to make if you already make 120? It's the same film without the complication of adding measuring paper backing.

@DavidHancock

4 жыл бұрын

The process is significantly different because the backing paper is two pieces and is attached to the film differently. So the become used for 220 is different than the one for 120.

David Great Job. I am currently deciding what film I should standardize on for my 4x5 Nature/Landscape photography. I lost AgafaPan 100 and Rodinal. I am currently using Trix and d-76. My thought was to switch to Illofrd products as it seems that they are committed to B&W traditional . My thought was FP4 with D76. Would like to hear your thoughts.--Dan

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Dan Levy Thank you! FP4+ is good for landscapes but it may we worth taking a few test shots of the same scene with different filters to see what you need to do to get the look you want. For D-76, it's hard to go wrong, but D-76. Have you tried Adox Rodinal? www.freestylephoto.biz/12054-Adox-Rodinal-Film-Developer-500ml I used AgfaPan a couple times, FP4+ would be a different film but a possibility. A 4X5 film I'm about to try soon is Atomic-X by New55. I've seen some captivating landscapes from it.

@Malibucompany

8 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock I think it is going to be Fp4 1-FP4 has been around a long time. Formula wont change. 2-Illford committed to trad process. FP4 been their flagship for a long time 3-It works well with pyro takes the stain well. 4-It costs less than all the others including tri-x. THink I will take it on and experiment with developers. Glad I can find a Rodinal formula loved that developer.--THank You

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

Dan Levy You're welcome. And good reasons to stick with FP4+. Even if the formula changes (it likely has in the last tn or so years due to chemicals becoming illegal in the U.K.), Ilford spends a TON on R&D every year to develop new formulations for emulsions that deliver the same performance as existing formulations.

@Malibucompany

8 жыл бұрын

+Dan Levy I may be moving over to HP5 it can see more. All around than FP-4. Any experience comparing the two?

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

Dan Levy I've used HP5+ a bit. I'm working on taking photos with it for it's future video. I'm not a particular fan. It's well engineered but I don't like the drain. I think it's a good 4X5 film and okay 120 film, but I don't care for the look on 35mm.

I've had problems with FP4s (120 film) that I've bought -- I'll stick with HP5+.

@DavidHancock

3 жыл бұрын

HP5+ is a fine choice, too.

Just an update from my previous comment a few months ago. I took your advise and bought a box of 8x10 FP4+. I also bought some D76. To really test this film I photographed the interior of an old settlement. I exposed at box speed and the dynamic range was really high. The wood shop was 8 stops and the generator room was about 10 stops. Knowing this was going to be a difficult scene, I exposed four sheets, two of each scene. Then I cut the development time by 50% to account for the large dynamic range and that I use a rotary development system. I have to say I was shocked when I pulled the negatives out of the developing drum. I held 99% of the details. Here is a link to the finished photos and a video I took if your interested: spencerpullen.com/black-and-white-photography/koreshan-state-historical-site-estero-florida-large-format-photography/ Keep up the great work! Thanks! Spencer

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you for sharing. Those are GREAT images. Good technique on the developing, too!

can you do one about HP5+?

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

It's in the works. I don't know exactly how many photos I have for the video yet (A lot are either undeveloped or developed and waiting to be digitized.) I also have a 100-foot spool of 127 HP5+ that I need to go through. So my expectations is that it will be early 2017.

@35mmlove_eric

8 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock cool man! Take your time! Your videos are really appreciated. Different take on reviewing a film. Not many people would take the time to review in that depth.

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

***** Thank you!

What happened to this series? More please! :)

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+Douglas Gottlieb They're in process. :D The Acros video has been live for a while. I'm about 90% complete on Fuji Natura 1600. I have to write and record the voiceover but I'm trying to find something from Fuji in the way of technical data on the film (so far I've found nothing.) I'm about 85% of the way through the image capture process for Retro 80S and Tri-X 400. I have about a dozen films that are around 15-55% through the image-capture process. It just takes a LONG time to get enough photos that I'm happy enough with. Each video needs around 150 images to run in the background. These are some of my favorite videos to do right now so I'm committed to continuing the series for a long time.

@douggottlieb

8 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock Thank you! These shows are FANTASTIC!!! I'm newly back to film and while there are a few "film shows" online, nothing comes close to the quality and info you are providing. Thanks again!!! What a great resource!

I have a rough estimate on the reciprocity function for fp4+ based on the chart shown in your video. It is something like 66.8 * (1.04 ^ x) - 67 where x is the measured exposure time in seconds. I've knocked together a quick app fp4.herokuapp.com/ to calculate the values although I think they are a little off for short exposure times.

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

Duncan Paterson Holy cow. That's amazing. I tested it against a bunch of known data points and they all checked out. It looks like it's probably spot on to about a 4- or 5-minute exposure reading (but beyond that is the realm of overnight photography and it's a whole other process.) That's really exceptional work. I added it to my video's references list. If you'd like to do more of those for other films, I'd be happy, always, to link them in the video description. Actually, that would be a pretty fantastic smartphone app (I'd buy it.) It would be nice to select a film from a drop-down, enter the meter reading, and find out the reciprocity correction.

@duncanpaterson5530

9 жыл бұрын

David Hancock Thanks, I'm in the middle of my thesis write up just now (so a little short on time), but I'd be happy to make more of these + run other numbers for your videos. I think the videos your making are a fantastic resource for anyone with an interest in film.

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

Duncan Paterson LOL. When I wrote my thesis, I disappeared from the world, except for the classes I taught. You have much better time management than I did.

@raytatonetti

9 жыл бұрын

I have a question and need your help with my canon a1. Could you please email me at raytatonetti@gmail.com

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

Ray Tatonetti I'm glad to answer it here (I use e-mail infrequently since I'm on it all day at work.) I also have a series of instructional videos about the Canon A1 that might answer it.

@raytatonetti

9 жыл бұрын

Oh no problem. I've tried to check your videos. I'm a new student and I bought a canon a1. It works great. I'm using it in full manual and understand how. What I can't figure out is if I'm properly setting it using my grey card. Since it doesn't have a normal light meter. Do I set it to full manual, half press my button and set it to the settings shown shoting at the grey card? I want to make sure I'm getting the best pics for class.

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

Ray Tatonetti With the A1 you can do that in manual, and I think your understanding of how to do it is correct, but it's a LOT easier to do it in aperture-priority. Set your aperture to the one you want to shoot with, point your lens at the card, and get your shutter speed. Then switch to manual and set that shutter speed. That's the basic answer everything after this is pontification about gray cards, if you want to skip it. So I'm not a huge fan of gray cards. I think they complicate things. As you know, what a gray card does is provide you a uniform surface against which to gauge your lighting and metering. However, it removes a lot of creative control, too. Light meters see the world as a uniform 18% gray (unless the light meter sees it as a uniform 12% gray.) In photo terms, we call that Zone 5 -- middle gray. So a light meter always assumes that everything is Zone 5 and a gray card lets you meter for that in your given lighting. So to that end, it's useful in helping up your changes of getting accurate tonal representation. A lot of things are about the same tone as 18% gray -- caucasian skin, pavement, light grass, some tree bark, and so forth. But the gray card will let you ascertain that at f5.6, zone 5 is 1/125th of a second. So if you then take a photo at that setting, everything that's approximately 18% gray (or of equal tonal value) will be zone 5. To me, using a gray card means that all your images will have the same tonal values. It's good for uniformity, detrimental to creative control. So, here's an example for you: in your photo you're holding a young kid, so I'm assuming it's your kid. Well, try this photo -- place the kid in a sunray near a window or under a tree or something like that. Use your gray card to take a light reading in the light, record those settings. Repeat with the gray card out of direct light, record those settings. Then take a meter reading off the kid's face in the sunlight and record those settings (the kid's face should be a stop brighter than the gray card, maybe two stops.) What you'll see from that experiment is how different settings affect exposure, but more importantly you'll see how to use the zone system. Putting the kid's face, which will be zone 6 or maybe even zone 7 as zone 5 will make the rest of the image dark, drawing a greater attention to the face. The whole point of that is this: Take a meter reading off what you want to have be a key element in the image. Make that your zone 5.

@raytatonetti

9 жыл бұрын

Any idea at all? I'm so stuck.

Easily the most comprehensive video on a film emulsion. It would be interesting to see a similar video on HP5 or Pan F Plus. As for reciprocity failure, my own, simplified definition is: within 1/10,000th of a sec. and 1/2 sec. (FP4) changes in aperture andshutter speed are reciprocal, i.e., f/22 @ 1/60 is equal to f/32 @ 1/30 or f/45 @ 1/15, etc.(decrease the aperture by one stop, increase the shutter speed by one stop, and vice-versa). Beyond 1/2 sec. in this example, reciprocity fails because a one stopincrease/ decrease in aperture is not compensated by one stop decrease/increase in shutter speed; you need to triple, quadruple, etc. the shutter speed or aperture size,and this relationship is not linear. I use FP4 and Delta 100 in 8x10, following Ilford'sguidelines, and I've never had a problem. Thanks again for the video...Can't waitto see the next one!

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

+dick91p Thank you. For most settings, your approach to reciprocity failure holds up, and it's how I go about reciprocity compensation, too. That model does not hold up superbly when I do astrophotography with exposures up to 15 minutes, however. The next in the series will be Acros 100. I worked on the script a bit last night but still have some work to do, including shooting my 4X5 Acros. I might try and see if the wife would be willing to sit for a few portraits this weekend.

@dick91p

8 жыл бұрын

+David Hancock You are right, exposures of 10+ minutes fall way outside the charts provided by manufacturers to address reciprocity failure in their films. Also, you cannot extrapolate from shorter times since the response is non-linear. Now, Acros 100 is amazing: no correction needed up to 120 secs. I can't wait to watch your video on this film. Keep up the good work!

@DavidHancock

8 жыл бұрын

dick91p Not only is no correction needed to 120 seconds, only 1/2 stop is needed from 121 to 1,000 seconds (when shot at the rated ISO.)

Thanks for the (very remediel) lesson on "What film is" and "How it works"! This is knowledge that I was taught in my very earliest years of public school. Maybe 4th or 5th grade, way back in the 1960's. And I find it both sad and astonishing that even today's "University Graduates" likely have ZERO idea of what Photography is or how it works! This is a technology that began with experiments done in France as early as the 1820's! And by 1990 was possibly at the pinnacle of development. Like any extremely useful and mature technology, it should have carried on in the service of Mankind for centuries! BUT...... Amazingly enough has nearly disappeared almost overnight. Partly due to the fact that most folks under 30 or 40 are simply so lazy! With an electronic "digital" image capture device, there is no skill or even thinking needed! The "device" does all the work. It's "automatic"! Truly very sad, indeed.

@DavidHancock

Жыл бұрын

Thank you, and yes, the film tech knowledge has largely been lost, and very fast. The area it's now the hardest to find people is in the chemistry. There was a time when universities offered courses and, I think a few, degrees in film chemistry engineering. Now no one, and this has been true for a good number of years, is coming out of college with an understanding of how film works so there's a LOT of training needed for any new chemical engineer going into the film world.

Ilford is hanging by a thread as the demand for film continues to decrease. The market is speaking and Ilford knows they will not recover a major machinery expense for 120/220 (which is what I shoot) Delta 100 is a good replacement for FP4. For my kind of shooting Tri-X souped in Xtol meets my needs. I am leaving on a 3 month trip where I will be taking a 6x6 camera along with my Canon. I will not have a darkroom during the trip. I will be souping the negs in Diafine with a Patterson daylight tank so I can develop in bathrooms and know I have printable images. I do not want to get back home and have no B&W images for the entire trip. Yeah, I can convert the Canon shots to B&W but I will not be able to erase the Scarlet A from my forehead if I do.

@DavidHancock

6 ай бұрын

I'd be interested to know where you heard that Ilford is only hanging on. I have heard nothing either way as Harman is fairly tight-lipped and I can't find anything to confirm or refute that in recent history. I am curious about whether or not film use and sales have declined. I'm not 100% certain. Again, I've not heard anything from Harman, though Kodak indicated last year that they had to hire people to work on film packaging because the demand was so high.

Great video! not sure if the reciprocity formula was updated, adjusted time = metered time ^ 1.26 (i.e metered time to the power of 1.26), looks like Ilford updated their tech sheet www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file/1919/product/686/

@DavidHancock

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

My reference to 'Acutol' and your question........this link might answer a few questions. www.apug.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-89696.html

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

northstar1950 That's one of the more complex formulae I've seen. Looks like it would be a good compound, however.

I've successfully pushed FP4 to iso 800 as a result of loading it instead of HP5. I've used HC-110, here is one pic - flic.kr/p/K5nVX3

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Holy cow. That's far beyond what I would have expected from FP4+ at 800. And your photo is very good, too.

From iso.org: "Because 'International Organization for Standardization' would have different acronyms in different languages (IOS in English, OIN in French for Organisation Internationale de Normalisation), our founders decided to give it the short form ISO. ISO is derived from the Greek isos, meaning equal. Whatever the country, whatever the language, we are always ISO." It's a word 'iso', not an acronym 'I-S-O'. Think isometric, isochronal or isosceles.

@DavidHancock

5 жыл бұрын

Yes. Thank you.

There must be a mistake in the written tekst at 20.50. The spoken tekst is correct. If the measured exposure is 10 seconds, the adjusted exposure time should be around 30 seconds. Next to the graph it says: "Reciprocity : f5.6 at 1/125 = f8 at 1/60 or f4 at 1/250" . I can't argue with that. If you stop down, you need longer exposure. But then you write: "Failure: f16 at 1/4 does not equal f2 at 8 seconds ". Right again, if you open the aperture from f16 (at 1/4 sec.) to f2, you need to shorten your exposure time from 1/4 to about 1/250. The tekst: "Compensation: f16 at 1/4 = f2 at 24 seconds with FP4+ " will overexpose your film with about 11 stops. Maybe you wanted to use an example with f16 at 4 sec and f22 at 8 sec measured exposure time ?

@DavidHancock

9 жыл бұрын

***** That's a good catch. I did that part of the narration on the fly and must have swapped parts of it when I spoke. I probably meant something more like f2 at 1/4 does not equal f16 at 8 seconds. Mathematically, that adds up and I'm guess that's what I did.

Electrons? Photons?

@DavidHancock

6 жыл бұрын

Photons, yes. I mis-spoke in the intro to this video.

isnt it photons ? 0:35

@DavidHancock

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, that is correct.

Geezus! You get it wrong in the first sentence??!!! "Photons", NOT "electrons". And yes, it does make a difference.

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Yup. And if you'll notice in the subsequent videos, that's been fixed.

I have pushed this film a lot. The max I have pushed it is to 2000 (4 stops).

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

That's an insane amount of push on this film! How were the results?

@travis_cannady

7 жыл бұрын

www.travcannphoto.com/sf-moma

@DavidHancock

7 жыл бұрын

Wow. Wow those are great results.

@travis_cannady

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you. I was very surprised with the results.

It's AK-U-tance. Think of accutance as "edge sharpness". FP4+ doesn't have the resolution of most prime lenses. It resolves about 100-125 lines per mm maximum. Many good lenses will resolve 200 lines per mm in the center of the format.

@DavidHancock

4 жыл бұрын

Your definition is pretty good, no issues there. And yes, many top-of-the-line-exceptional lenses will render in the near-200-lp/mm range, but the typical lens that most people shoot with is around 100-125 with some lenses even lower. As for acutance, are you certain on your pronunciation? I have the dictionary and a masters degree in English saying my pronunciation is correct. www.dictionary.com/browse/acutance?s=t

Much nicer than the musy, grainy mess Tri-X.

@DavidHancock

2 жыл бұрын

Slower films do tend to have a smaller grain profile.